On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Venkatesh Nayak <
[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> Dear all,
> All rules prescribing fees for appeals are in excess of the provisions of
> the principal Act. The guidelines issued by the DoPT do not make mention of
> any such fees that may be charged for appeals or complaints. Six states and
> several High Courts have brought in appeals fees in the Rules. If
> Parliament
> intended that fees should be charged for filing appeals it would have said
> so in section 19 just as it mentioned application fees in section 6. I am
> afraid the mistake committed by the High Court has been held valid by the
> CIC. While I mean no disrespect to the wisdom of the CIC I simply cannot
> agree with this interpretation of the term 'may be prescribed'. The State
> Information Commission of Bihar found the appeals fee notified in the State
> RTI Rules against the letter and spirit of the RTI Act and succeeded in
> convincing the Government to change the rules. In any case they were not
> insisting on appeals fees even before the change was made.
> I am afraid an error has been upheld without convincing reasoning.
> Thanks
> Venkat
>
>
> _____
>
> From: [email protected] <rti_india%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:
> [email protected] <rti_india%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf
> Of suresh nangia
> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 12:09 PM
> To: [email protected] <rti_india%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [rti_india] Fees for First Appeal are OK, decides CIC
>
>
> Dear Mr Roy
>
> I read your mails posted on rti board, with interest and try to grasp
> the finer points of interpretation of various provisions of RTI Act. I find
> these to be quite interesting & useful.
>
> As regards your observation regarding fee for filing appeal, I hold a
> different point of view
> It may not be correct or proper to say that there is no provision for
> filing an Appeal under RTI. As per Section 27 of the Act, the power to make
> rules for carrying out the provisions of the Act has been delegated to the
> appropriate government (which too has been defined under Sec 2). While Sec
> 27(2)(a, b & c) require prescribing of fee for (a) charges payable for
> the information requisitioned and (b) fee payable for filing
> application, Section 27(2)(d) requires for prescribing the procedure to
> be followed for filing appeals. Section 19(10) which bears a reference in
> Sec 27(2)(d) of the Act, makes it mandatory for the SIC / CIC as the case
> may be, to follow the procedure so prescribed. It is in pursuit of the
> provisions of Section 27 that various Governments (State & Central) have
> framed rules for carrying out the provisions of RTI Act, and this includes
> the fee payable for filing of appeal(s). Sections 6(1) and
> 7(1&5) referred to by you and which are also quoted / referred under Sec
> 27(2)(b&c) of the Act, only state that an RTI application should be made
> accompanying fee as may be prescribed (by appropriate government).In my
> view, if a particular Government has prescribed a fee for filing appeal and
> this has been duly notified in accordance with the procedure laid down, it
> can not be faulted and/or questioned. In Law, it may not always be proper
> to
> read and quote a particular section in isolation and it needs to be read in
> conjunction with provisions of other sections as may be contained in that
> Act.
>
> I hope, I have made my point clear
>
> S K NANGIA
>
> --- On Tue, 11/8/09, sroy1947 <sroy1...@yahoo. <mailto:
> sroy1947%40yahoo.com <sroy1947%2540yahoo.com>>
> com> wrote:
>
> From: sroy1947 <sroy1...@yahoo. 
> <mailto:sroy1947%40yahoo.com<sroy1947%2540yahoo.com>>
> com>
> Subject: [rti_india] Fees for First Appeal are OK, decides CIC
> To: rti_in...@yahoogrou 
> <mailto:rti_india%40yahoogroups.com<rti_india%2540yahoogroups.com>>
> ps.com
> Date: Tuesday, 11 August, 2009, 11:08 AM
>
> http://cic.gov. in/CIC-Orders/ WB-07082009- 02.pdf
>
> "Sub sec. (1) of Sec. 6 speaks of fees to be prescribed to accompany the
>
> request made by a person who desires to obtain information to a CPIO or
>
> CAPIO. Similarly u/s 7(1) an application made u/s 6 is to be responded on
> payment of the fee prescribed. There is indeed no fee mandated in the law
> for appeal u/s 19 (1) or (3). However u/s 28(2) (iv) the Competent
> Authority
> has the discretion to provide for any other matter which is not only
> required to be, but may be prescribed, as underlined by us in the quote
> above. In this case, therefore, the High Court of Delhi is well within its
> authority to prescribe such a fee, keeping in mind only the requirement of
> proviso to Sub-Section (5) of Sec 7.that the fee is reasonable inasmuch as
> it may be in reference to Sec 6 (1) or
>
> sub-sections (1) and (5) of Sec 7."
>
> Looking for local information? Find it on Yahoo! Local http://in.local.
> <http://in.local.yahoo.com/> yahoo.com/
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply via email to